Woman found guilty of raping two women. Remanded in custody for sentence end February

Recorded as a crime committed by a male, obviously.

He is not factually anything else, however much he may wish to be. Emotions and feelings are not facts.

Will it? I don't know if it will be recorded as committed by Isla Bryson (female) or Adam Graham (male), and if female how that will square with the charge of rape.

Look at this headline, though
news.stv.tv/east-central/andrew-miller-appears-in-court-charged-with-abduction-of-11-year-old-girl

It is unequivocal - Man charged with abduction. 'He is also known as Amy'. No pretence any more - we are making progress.

Just announced that whilst they review the situation all new admissions will be allocated to prisons according to their sex.

Dare we begin to believe the nonsense is being successfully challenged. That victims giving evidence won’t have to refer to their attacker as she, talk about her penis.
The news link Doodle posted sets it out in words anyone can understand and no one can challenge

The Scottish Prisons will now admit inmates in accordance with their gender registered at birth.

varian

The Scottish Prisons will now admit inmates in accordance with their gender registered at birth.

And this time does gender at birth really mean sex at birth?

Apparently so. Newborn babies tend not to express a different opinion.

So why isn't it referred too as 'sex at birth' then?

Doodledog

Will it? I don't know if it will be recorded as committed by Isla Bryson (female) or Adam Graham (male), and if female how that will square with the charge of rape.

Look at this headline, though
news.stv.tv/east-central/andrew-miller-appears-in-court-charged-with-abduction-of-11-year-old-girl

It is unequivocal - Man charged with abduction. 'He is also known as Amy'. No pretence any more - we are making progress.

Yes, he was referred to as he and him and Andrew Miller in the main ITV News report.

eazybee

Recorded as a crime committed by a male, obviously.

He is not factually anything else, however much he may wish to be. Emotions and feelings are not facts.

I realise that.

But could evade future justice by claiming he is a woman, changing his name and living as the opposite sex.

Should he commit a further crime, his fingerprints and presumably DNA will be on record and he will be identified by that.

I know that. Believe me, I do.

But if he changes his name, moves location and identifies as a woman?
Or a Wolfhound?

Recorded as a crime committed by a male, obviously.

Obviously.

But it may need to be noted as an addendum that this man has been known to self-identify as a woman so that the police will be aware when or if another offence is committed.

Smileless2012

So why isn't it referred too as 'sex at birth' then?

Another attempt to complete sex with gender sex, which is immutable and gender which some say is fluid nowadays.

Why do the press et al constantly pander to these people and use the pronouns they want?
As far as I am concerned if it has a penis it's a man.
If it hasn't it's a woman.
I do understand that in a few cases some people do feel they have been"born in the wrong body"

Claudiaclaws

Why do the press et al constantly pander to these people and use the pronouns they want?
As far as I am concerned if it has a penis it's a man.
If it hasn't it's a woman.
I do understand that in a few cases some people do feel they have been"born in the wrong body"

I do understand that in a few cases some people do feel they have been"born in the wrong body"

... which is a "feeling" - and should be respected, even if not understood. And accommodated as such.

But it is still a 'feeling' (unless there is some physical manifestation of indeterminate sex at birth - a whole different kettle of fish). A man who feels he's in-the-wrong-body might identify as a woman, but if he retains his male genitalia, then when it comes to safe spaces for women, surely he must be regarded as a man?

If, on the other hand, he wants to wear a dress, or adopt other attributes of womanhood in his normal, everyday life, change his name, etc, then I don't see a problem - whether he sports facial hair, or not, or looks like a woman, or not... if he's not invading the space of biological women, I personally wouldn't be concerned.

That’s what I’ve been calling the third way - respecting transpeople as transpeople and supporting them to live as such. Not as the sex they ‘identify’ into, which should have its rights protected by law, but there should be no restrictions on how people dress or otherwise present themselves.

varian

Apparently so. Newborn babies tend not to express a different opinion.

We shouldn't have to presume.
'Gender' being completely different from sex, as we're often told, that word shouldn't be used when actual biological sex is meant.

Callistemon I don't know what point you're trying to make.
Surely DNA of a suspected perpetrator of crime would be compared with DNA from a crime site, regardless of the sex or identity of that suspect.

If DNA from a suspect is to be used to check if that person has offended before, wouldn't it be compared against all other samples on record?
And, in any case, wouldn't it be clear from the sample which sex the person is?

If DNA identifies the suspect as male, then the police will be looking for a man, not a man with a woman's name and the outward appearance of a woman.

I can see how additional information that the suspect may self id as a woman would be beneficial in these circumstances.

It is looking as if some common sense is at last entering the whole arena. The issue of intact males who identify as women being housed in female prisons has finally entered the wider public domain. Public perception that males can also be put on female hospital wards, into female refuges and the few other single sex areas has awakened many to the risks of self ID. The Scottish Parliament rejected an amendment to their bill that would stop males just self IDing after being charged. The foolishness of that decision is coming home to roost, as they attempt to talk their way out of the current concerns. Nicola Sturgeon says transwomen are women, but depending on the nature of the crime they may be sent to a male prison. Why? No woman is sent to a male prison, not even the likes of Myra Hindley or Rose West who have committed the most heinous crimes. Using the term "this individual" a dozen times to avoid using man or woman doesn't disguise reality.
The 'third way' preferred by Doodledog and others would address so many of these problems.

FarNorth

Callistemon I don't know what point you're trying to make.
Surely DNA of a suspected perpetrator of crime would be compared with DNA from a crime site, regardless of the sex or identity of that suspect.

If DNA from a suspect is to be used to check if that person has offended before, wouldn't it be compared against all other samples on record?
And, in any case, wouldn't it be clear from the sample which sex the person is?

Yes, yes and yes.
I know.

Commits a crime when living as a man, DNA put on database, serves sentence but then relocates and changes gender. Re-offends but police are hunting a male suspect.
Am I over-thinking this?

Smileless2012

If DNA identifies the suspect as male, then the police will be looking for a man, not a man with a woman's name and the outward appearance of a woman.

I can see how additional information that the suspect may self id as a woman would be beneficial in these circumstances.

Thanks Smileless
I'm glad you got it!

Yes, the suspect could re-identify and re-locate even before caught for the original offence.

Well, really the police should always be considering that a suspect might do that, not just ones with a note on their file.